Will Canada step up its military and financial commitment to NATO as Russian aggression in the east intensifies?

When U.S. President Barack Obama told Polish President Bronislaw Komorowski on Tuesday he’d contribute another $1 billion to bolster their military might in eastern Europe, he invited his western partners to step up to the plate.

On Wednesday, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, right behind Obama on a quick swing through Poland and Ukraine before the G7 meeting in Brussels, told Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk that he is adding another 75 troops to the 45 already in the region and he is considering increasing Canada’s commitment to NATO.

“We are very much looking at options for additional presence going forward, but no decisions have been taken,” Harper said in Warsaw, where he attended 25th-anniversary celebrations marking the first free elections in the former communist country. After his stop in Poland, Harper boarded a plane to Brussels for the G7 summit.

In response to the Russian annexation of Crimea, Canadian troops will join a 2,000-strong U.S. army and Europe-led mission called Saber Strike 2014, an annual military exercise that this year is being held in Poland and the Baltic states.

Obama was no doubt looking for a little bit more from Canada than the strong, hawkish words he has so far received from Harper on the importance of keeping the Russians at bay.

For the last several years, many NATO countries have not kept up their defence spending to meet the benchmark expected by all alliance members — 2 per cent of each nation’s gross domestic product.

In order for NATO to be effective, each member “has to do its fair share,” the Washington Post reported that Obama said.

Obama was in Poland for a two-day visit to try to reassure eastern allies that they have the United States full support and an attack on one NATO member is an attack on them all. Poland is a member of NATO but Ukraine is not. However, NATO nations have vowed to come to Ukraine’s aid.

“After investing so much blood and treasure to bring Europe together, we refuse to allow the dark tactics of the 20th century to define the 21st,” Obama said in Warsaw.

While the U.S. does not want to shoulder the promise of keeping eastern Europe safe all alone, NATO does not have a large fleet of military equipment and soldiers of its own, ready to act when a situation emerges. Instead, it relies on member nations to keep up their own armies in order for the greater NATO body to be well equipped, notes Roland Paris, the director of the Centre for International Policy Studies at the University of Ottawa.

In 2009, Canada spent 1.9 per cent of its gross domestic product on defence and by 2013 spending had declined to 1.0 per cent. That is the same percentage that Belgium spends. The U.S. spent 4.4 per cent in 2013, the report noted.

“What is very important for NATO is that its members maintain capable military forces. Ultimately, there are very few assets that NATO owns,” said Paris. “That is the context where the decline in defence spending is problematic.”

The lack of a stronger military commitment from the prime minister, who has been one of the most vocal leaders against Russian aggression in Ukraine, is not really a surprise if defence spending patterns are scrutinized.

“Canada has been active. Its contributions have been modest. They have been relevant and timely. The goal of the entire effort has been to reassure eastern European members of NATO that their security will be protected by the alliance,” Paris said.

“But I think it would be an exaggeration to suggest that Canada was leading the effort,” he said.

After the fall of communism in eastern Europe and the end of the Cold War, NATO has spent some time having an identity crisis, wondering what its function was.

“There was, for much of the year, a thought that NATO was experiencing an existential crisis again, asking, ‘What is it for?’ Well, these events have answered the question,” Paris said.

Now that the security of Europe is no longer guaranteed, Canada might be giving some thought to its “a la cart” foreign policy.

“NATO is viewed favourably by the Canadian government only in the moments it is viewed as useful. Suddenly we are huge supporters of NATO again, whereas a year ago, foreign diplomats in NATO were wondering why Canada was leaning back, disengaging,” Paris said.

“I heard that in off-the-record interviews I had with foreign diplomats and foreign officials at NATO headquarters in Feb, 2013. That was the view.”